• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

With Reservations, Obama Signs Act to Allow Detention of Citizens

1Perry said:
There were bills passed by the House to raise the limit. Those bills were supported by the Tea Party.
Click to expand...

What are you talking about?

The debt crisis was about the limit not being raised. Once the House finally voted to raise the limit, obviously the crisis ended. That doesn't mean there was no crisis in the first place. It's what we're discussing. The Tea Party initially OPPOSED raising the debt limit.
 
misterman said:
The debt crisis was about the limit not being raised. Once the House finally voted to raise the limit, obviously the crisis ended.
Click to expand...

There's another debt crisis though that has to do with having too much debt. Obviously stacking up more debt doesn't resolve this one.
 
The TEA Party is a recognized party in Congress now?
 
Neomalthusian said:
The TEA Party is a recognized party in Congress now?
Click to expand...

Yes, as a group or voting bloc. Not a formal political party. But that's what they call themselves. There is a formal Tea Party Caucus in the House.
 
misterman said:
Well, yeah, that's the bill that prevented the crisis at the last minute. The threat was still there, and it still would have caused an immediate, large cut in spending if that bill hadn't been passed. And the Tea Party was the main reason it nearly didn't pass.
Click to expand...

No, you didn't read the article did you? The bill that passed was indeed passed at the last moment but this one passed earlier and was backed by the Tea Party.

Tuesday, July 19, 2011

Washington -- Two Central New York Republicans helped the House pass its "cut, cap and balance" deficit reduction plan Tuesday night in a largely symbolic measure backed by tea party conservatives.
 
1Perry said:
House passes Republican debt limit bill with help from two Central New York members | syracuse.com
Click to expand...

The bill that would cripple medicare and SS but protect the tax cuts for the wealthy and military spending that helped create our debt in the first place???

And you are surprised that the representatives of the elderly and the middle class would not go along with it?????

Why would representatives of the middle class support more of the same redistribution of wealth from the middle class as the GOP has done for the last 30 years?

If a dog bites you once, its the dog's fault. If a dog bites you over and over again, its your fault.
 
Catawba said:
The bill that would cripple medicare and SS but protect the tax cuts for the wealthy and military spending that helped create our debt in the first place???
Click to expand...

The arguement was that the Tea Party wanted to end the government. Nothing in that bill or anything they ever supported called for the end of the government.
 
Catawba said:
The bill that would cripple medicare and SS but protect the tax cuts for the wealthy and military spending that helped create our debt in the first place?
Click to expand...

1) Every federal expenditure "helps create our debt in the first place."

2) Medicare has to be "crippled" to deal with the funding issues we're facing with it. And SS has to be bumped back to fit the bell curve of our life expectancies.

Why would representatives of the middle class support more of the same redistribution of wealth from the middle class as the GOP has done for the last 30 years?
Click to expand...

For the most part they're not actually representing the middle class.

If a dog bites you once, its the dog's fault. If a dog bites you over and over again, its your fault.
Click to expand...

Fool me twice... y-... Ya fool me I can't get fooled aginn.
 
1Perry said:
The arguement was that the Tea Party wanted to end the government. Nothing in that bill or anything they ever supported called for the end of the government.
Click to expand...

It would lead to the end of two of its most important functions, SS and M/M.
 
Neomalthusian said:
1) Every federal expenditure "helps create our debt in the first place."
Click to expand...

Wrong, it is the imbalance between income and expenditure that creates debt.

2) Medicare has to be "crippled" to deal with the funding issues we're facing with it.
Click to expand...

Wrong, our health care system has to upgraded as the rest of the industrialized world has done. Crippling Medicare just shifts unaffordable health care costs directly to our seniors.

And SS has to be bumped back to fit the bell curve of our life expectancies.
Click to expand...

I would agree with bumping the retirement age by two years. But that by itself will not be not be enough to make up the amount borrowed from the SS trust funds to pay for the last decade of military spending. The contribution cap will have to be raised as necessary to make up the short fall. That fixes the SS problem for the foreseeable future.

For the most part they're not actually representing the middle class.
Click to expand...

The majority of Americans supports keeping SS and MM as is and the majority of Americans support increasing the tax rates for the rich to help with our deficit spending, and the majority of Americans supported the American Jobs Act the GOP voted down.

If you think the middle class supports the class war being waged on them by the GOP, you are in for a big surprise in November.
 
Last edited:
misterman said:
Well, yeah, that's the bill that prevented the crisis at the last minute. The threat was still there, and it still would have caused an immediate, large cut in spending if that bill hadn't been passed. And the Tea Party was the main reason it nearly didn't pass.
Click to expand...
And the Tea Party's tantrum during the debt ceiling debacle was a major contributing reason that S&P downgraded the U.S. credit rating (S&P said as much).

Of course, that observation won't fly at the Kool Aid klatch ;)

Neither will this one -- The Tea Party has two major goals, both of them ideologically pure from a hard right wing conservative (GOP) viewpoint:

1. "Starve the beast". More simply, kill-off gov't programs that they don't like, rather than address those issues legislatively or at the ballot box. Shut down the gov't by refusing to pass budgets and refusing to pass debt ceiling increases (unless they contain ludicrous poison-pill provisions). About the only gov't program that I can see they do like is the military; everything else appears to be on the chopping block (at least 50% of the gov't).

2. The worse the economic situation of the country becomes, including defaults and downgrades, the better their odds are of winning the next election. Were they to kick the country while it is down, it can only help their electoral prospects (as long as they don't get caught doing the kicking). As you may have heard from right wing talk radio soon after Obama was elected, they are hoping for failure. It is almost treasonous.
 
Karl said:
That is a long term hard right wing goal, that they are still pursuing vigorously (just ask Paul Ryan, although he lately has almost completely flip-flopped on Medicare).
Click to expand...

Sounds good to me... I can invest it and take out insurance and invest in my own future medical maladies much better than the government. Hell, if M/M went away, prices would drop like a stone anyway --- doctors would actually get PAID quickly and let the patient submit their receipts to the insurance company. Best not to bet SS will be viable the way our douche politicians spend money... SS is the politicians play-money account.
 
Karl said:
That is a long term hard right wing goal, that they are still pursuing vigorously (just ask Paul Ryan, although he lately has almost completely flip-flopped on Medicare).
Click to expand...

Oh, I know, but for the previous 3 decades that agenda was more disguised. It wasn't until 2010 that the GOP felt free enough to openly wage war on the middle class. In their tea party inspired boldness, they forgot the words of wisdom from the old school Republicans like Dwight D. Eisenhower -

“Should any political party attempt to abolish social security unemployment insurance and eliminate labor laws and farm programs you would not hear of that party again in our political history. There is a tiny splinter group of course that believes you can do these things. Among them are a few other Texas oil millionaires and an occasional politician or business man from other areas. Their number is negligible and they are stupid.”

This lesson will be relearned in November.
 
Catawba said:
Wrong, it is the imbalance between income and expenditure that creates debt.
Click to expand...

Therefore I'm not wrong, as every expenditure plays its part to contribute to our debt. It's not just the expenditures you dislike that contribute to the imbalance you're talking about.

Wrong, our health care system has to upgraded as the rest of the industrialized world has done. Crippling Medicare just shifts unaffordable health care costs directly to our seniors.
Click to expand...

Which is precisely where it belongs. Leaving it as is promises seniors that their childrens' generations will pay for everything they need even though this is impossible. Hence "unfunded." Unable to be afforded.

I would agree with bumping the retirement age by two years. The contribution cap will have to be raised as necessary to make up the short fall. That fixes the SS problem for the foreseeable future.
Click to expand...

What fixes it forever is raising the eligibility age to merge with the bell curve of deaths. Why not fix it once and for all?

The majority of Americans supports keeping SS and MM as is and the majority of Americans support increasing the tax rates for the rich to help with our deficit spending, and the majority of Americans supported the American Jobs Act the GOP voted down.
Click to expand...

The majority of Americans supports policies that are unfunded, unaffordable and fiscally and economically destructive over the long term. Forgive me if I don't stand corrected when presented with an appeal to majority opinion.
 
1Perry said:
No, you didn't read the article did you? The bill that passed was indeed passed at the last moment but this one passed earlier and was backed by the Tea Party.
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter what was passed earlier. The debt was about to run out after any such bill was passed. The Tea Party opposed raising the debt ceiling at that time. And your quote says it all: "largely symbolic measure."
 
Ockham said:
Sounds good to me... I can invest it and take out insurance and invest in my own future medical maladies much better than the government.
Click to expand...

No you can't.

You ever shop for individual health insurance? Unless you're very young and healthy, it's really expensive, and until Obamacare, you could be banned from buying it at all if you or a family member had a pre-existing condition. The government, however (like private employers) can pool thousands of insured people together and get much lower rates.
 
Neomalthusian said:
Therefore I'm not wrong, as every expenditure plays its part to contribute to our debt. It's not just the expenditures you dislike that contribute to the imbalance you're talking about.
Click to expand...

Just as does every cut in revenue. SS has not created a dime of our debt, and crippling M/M does nothing to address the spiraling health care cost over the last 30 years of deregulation. As is plain to the majority of American public, requiring continued sacrifice by the seniors without any sacrifice in the tax cuts to the wealthy is class war.

It took 30 years of spending too much, mainly on the military, and taxing the rich too little to create our debt. Consequently, it will take 30 years of the opposite to significantly address our debt.

Which is precisely where it belongs. Leaving it as is promises seniors that their childrens' generations will pay for everything they need even though this is impossible. Hence "unfunded." Unable to be afforded.
Click to expand...

Thankfully, the majority of the country does not agree with your proposal to throw the seniors to the dogs.


What fixes it forever is raising the eligibility age to merge with the bell curve of deaths. Why not fix it once and for all?
Click to expand...

Raising the cap does fix it, and more equitably than the redistribution of wealth you and the GOP envision.



The majority of Americans supports policies that are unfunded, unaffordable and fiscally and economically destructive over the long term. Forgive me if I don't stand corrected when presented with an appeal to majority opinion.
Click to expand...


Ignore public opinion if it suits your spin. However, public opinion is how it will be decided in November.
 
misterman said:
No you can't.
Click to expand...
:lol:

I already do.

misterman said:
You ever shop for individual health insurance?
Click to expand...
Yes I have.

misterman said:
Unless you're very young and healthy, it's really expensive, and until Obamacare, you could be banned from buying it at all if you or a family member had a pre-existing condition.
Click to expand...
The older you get the more expensive insurance gets certainly - and the reason is the older you get the more of a chance you will have a physical ailment. I'm 43 and my private insurance is not that expensive. Then again, I forgo my VA insurance and depending on the coverage you want, it can be either moderate to VERY expensive. I pay about $900 a year on a PPO, which includes preventative eye and dental. My 84 year old mother - she pays $800 a quarter for health insurance (that's over and above the Medicare she gets from the Government), and she has Medicare Plan D - her supplemental health care insurance is expensive but then again she has a few different ailments, one of them serious. While I hear the horror stories about people getting dropped, it's not happened to me or any of my family or extended family - some of which have very serious ailments. While I'm sure they occur, it's my opinion that those occurrences are not the rule, but the exception.

misterman said:
The government, however (like private employers) can pool thousands of insured people together and get much lower rates.
Click to expand...
The Governments track record of managing ANYTHING other than the military (and even that is suspect economically) is an almost total and abject failure. Their historical record is abysmal. I trust myself more than the government .... I know... crazy huh?
 
Ockham said:
I trust myself more than the government .... I know... crazy huh?
Click to expand...

The point is that the majority of Americans trust the government more than you or the insurance companies that keep tripling our rates every few years.
 
Catawba said:
The point is that the majority of Americans trust the government more than you or the insurance companies that keep tripling our rates every few years.
Click to expand...

Then clearly the majority of American's are misguided and misinformed for trusting the government more than themselves. That or they're just lazy ****s.
 
misterman said:
It doesn't matter what was passed earlier. The debt was about to run out after any such bill was passed. The Tea Party opposed raising the debt ceiling at that time. And your quote says it all: "largely symbolic measure."
Click to expand...

The article states that as the Senate had no desire to pass a responsible spending bill. It does matter as far as the claims go. The House passed a bill to address the debt issue all without shutting down the government with the Tea Party backing.

Accusation dismissed.
 
Ockham said:
Then clearly the majority of American's are misguided and misinformed for trusting the government more than themselves. That or they're just lazy ****s.
Click to expand...

Or, they know that government managed M/M have less overhead and none of the profit that private insurance adds to the cost, added to the private insurance companies right to deny you coverage if they so choose.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom